Report an error
Total comments on minutephysics YouTube videos correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
The number of sewing machine operators in Iowa | r=0.95 | 12yrs | Yes! |
Google searches for 'Gangnam Style' | r=0.93 | 12yrs | Yes! |
Popularity of the 'bazinga' meme | r=0.92 | 13yrs | No |
Popularity of the 'bad luck brian' meme | r=0.92 | 13yrs | Yes! |
Arson in South Dakota | r=0.92 | 12yrs | No |
UFO sightings in Connecticut | r=0.87 | 11yrs | No |
The number of movies Shia LaBeouf appeared in | r=0.68 | 13yrs | No |
Total comments on minutephysics YouTube videos also correlates with...
<< Back to discover a correlation
You caught me! While it would be intuitive to sort only by "correlation," I have a big, weird database. If I sort only by correlation, often all the top results are from some one or two very large datasets (like the weather or labor statistics), and it overwhelms the page.
I can't show you *all* the correlations, because my database would get too large and this page would take a very long time to load. Instead I opt to show you a subset, and I sort them by a magic system score. It starts with the correlation, but penalizes variables that repeat from the same dataset. (It also gives a bonus to variables I happen to find interesting.)